Your Essay Outline worksheet should include: Worksheet attached to the question where you need to put your answer
make sure to fulfill the requirements as well as make sure all questions are answered from the attached article(Memory of love for mother a comparison.pdf)
1. A thesis statement: Based on the concepts you identify in the article and how they relate to biology and behavior.
2. Identify and define 2 psychological concepts and how they are used in the article.
3. A summary: (in your own words) of the article with relevant information about the psychological concept, their research question, the research method, (procedures, tests, sample/population), and major findings.
4. Evaluation: What 2 things do you find interesting about this article?
5. Skeleton of Conclusion: In your conclusion, you need to have an idea of how all your research helps your thesis statement.
Your Essay Outline worksheet should include: Worksheet attached to the question where you need to put your answer make sure to fulfill the requirements as well as make sure all questions are answered
Cognition, Language, and Development Black American College Students Report Higher Memory of Love for Mothers in Childhood Than White Students Lawrence Patihis , Corai E. Jackson, Jonathan C. Diaz, Elena V. Stepanova, and Mario E. Herrera Department of Psychology, University of Southern Mississippi, MS, USA Abstract Cultural differences between Black and White individuals in the South are con- nected to the inequitable history of the United States. We wondered if these cultural differences would translate to a particularly precious aspect of life: memories of love felt in childhood toward one’s parents. Some past studies have shown that Whites score higher on parental attachment measures to parents than Blacks, while other studies show no significant differences. However, no previous study has ever measured memory of feelings of love in relation to differences between ethnicities. In this study, Black (n¼124) and White (n¼125) undergraduates self- reported the strength and frequency of their past feelings of love toward their mother and father in first, sixth, and ninth grade as well as their current feelings of love. Results suggested that Black students reported feeling more love for their mothers in first, sixth, and ninth grades compared to White students. These findings were not explained when we statistically adjusted for age, gender, socioeconomic status, education levels, income, number of years spent living with mother or father, stress, or personality. Therefore, this relationship may be explained by unmeasured or unmeasurable cultural differences. The direction of this effect was in the opposite direction from what we expected based on past attachment research. Given the inequities in U.S. history and the current discussions around ethnicity and race in the United States, the finding that Blacks reported higher remembered feelings of love for their mothers in childhood is intriguing and worthy of dissemination and discussion. Psychological Reports 2019, Vol. 122(3) 880–898 !The Author(s) 2018 Article reuse guidelines: sagepub.com/journals-permissions DOI: 10.1177/0033294118772549 journals.sagepub.com/home/prx Corresponding Author: Lawrence Patihis, Department of Psychology, University of Southern Mississippi, 118 College Drive #5025, Hattiesburg, MS 39406, USA. Email: [email protected] Keywords Love, emotion, memory, Black, White, ethnicity Introduction The history of the South of the United States is marred with the inequalities between Black or African-American (hereafter ‘‘Black’) individuals and White American (hereafter ‘‘White’’) individuals. First slavery and then the Jim Crow era have had a lingering eﬀect on the respective cultures of Black and White individuals, and that may be especially true in the South of the United States. These eﬀects may have transferred to cultural diﬀerences in childhood experi- ences, strategies in raising oﬀspring, and as a result diﬀering bonds and feelings between parents and oﬀspring. In particular, we wondered if this cultural diver- sity has resulted in diﬀerences in an especially precious aspect of our lives: feelings of love and memories of love toward parents during our childhoods. To our knowledge, no past research has measured this with regard to race or ethnicity. Nevertheless, we know that some measures of attachment correlate with the subscales of the Memory of Love towards Parents Questionnaire (MLPQ; Patihis, Herrera, & Arnau, 2018), and hence we will review previous research that has investigated diﬀerences in parental attachment in Black versus White individuals (e.g., Bakermans-Kranenburg, Ijzendoorn, & Kroonenberg, 2004; Giordano, Cernkovich, & DeMaris, 1993; Haggerty, Skinner, McGlynn- Wright, Catalano, & Crutchﬁeld, 2013). In this study, we set out to investigate whether there are diﬀerences between Black and White individuals in their memory of feelings of love toward parents while collecting a number of possible covariate measures that may explain any diﬀerences between Black and White individuals. Race and parental attachment Although we found no past research on race and ethnicity and memory of feelings of love in childhood, we found research on parental attachment in Black and White individuals which could help form hypotheses. Although there is a wider literature on attachment among other ethnic and racial cate- gories (e.g., Emmen et al., 2013; Mesman, IJzendoorn, & Bakermans- Kranenburg, 2012), in the review below we focus on research on Black and White individuals. We found mixed results: ﬁrst we discuss the literature in which Blacks scored lower on parental attachment scales, then results showing no signiﬁcant diﬀerences and then discuss research indicating Black individuals scored higher on secure attachment. Lower scores on parental attachment scales in Blacks.Some research has shown that young Black children are less securely attached than White children Patihis et al.881 (e.g., Bakermans-Kranenburg et al., 2004). Bakermans-Kranenburg et al. (2004) observed families from 10 diﬀerent locations in the United States (142 Black and 1002 White). Attachment between the children and mothers was measured with the Attachment Q-Sort which is a description of 90 behaviors in the natural home setting (Waters, 1995). The researchers found Black mothers showed less sensitivity responding to their infant during the child’s ﬁrst two years, and Black children’s attachment security at two years of age was signiﬁcantly lower than White children. Bakermans-Kranenburg et al. (2004) suggest that the socio- economic status (SES) diﬀerences between the two groups account for this: speciﬁcally that poverty may hamper maternal sensitivity to young children, and that maternal insensitivity in turn leads to lower rates of secure attachment. Rice, Cunningham, and Young (1997) found that Black college students in the South of the United States scored lower on a care from father subscale of the Parental Bonding Instrument (PBI; Parker, Tupling, & Brown, 1979) compared to the White students—but found no signiﬁcant diﬀerences among Black and White adolescents in other comparisons (i.e., PBI subscales for care of mothers and protection of mother or father). Rice et al. (1997) oﬀered explanations for these diﬀerences between Black and White individuals by discussing the factor of diﬀering percentages of mother-only households. The researchers found that attachment to fathers was important because it was related to the subsequent development of social competences in the child. Utilizing a sample of college students in the Midwest of the United States, Wei, Russell, Mallinckrodt, and Zakalik (2004) did not measure parental attach- ment directly but found that attachment avoidance in romantic relationships was higher in Black compared to White college students. However, Black and White participants scored similarly on attachment anxiety (Wei et al., 2004; Experiences in Close Relationship Scale: Brennan, Clark, & Shaver, 1998). Wei et al. (2004) suggest that one interpretation of these results is diﬀerences (and similarities) in the acculturation process of Black and White Americans. They also posit that adjustment issues and cultural mistrust might mitigate adult attachments to peers for Black students in a predominantly White Midwestern university. Comparable attachment in Black and White individuals.Other research has found similar attachment scores in Black and White individuals. For example, Dexter, Wong, Stacks, Beeghly, and Barnett (2013) utilized the strange situation (Ainsworth, Blehar, Waters, & Wall, 1978) and laboratory observation with Black and White preschool children from the Midwest of the United States. Dexter et al. (2013) found that race was not a strong determinant of attachment in low-income preschoolers, although they noted a ‘‘nonsigniﬁcant trend’’ (p¼.093) whereby 41% of White preschoolers were securely attached, while 32% of Black preschoolers were. In Haggerty et al. (2013), Black and White adolescents scored similarly on parent attachment. 882Psychological Reports 122(3) Higher scores on parental attachment scales in Black individuals.Nevertheless, Cernkovich and Giordano (1987) found that Black adolescents in the Midwest of the United States scored higher on one measure related to attachment: self-reported perceptions caring and trust in their relationship with their parents but showed no diﬀerences on intimacy communication. Apparently utilizing the same sample, Giordano et al. (1993) found that Black adolescents reported higher levels of self-reported intimacy within the family compared to White adolescents (adjusting for age and SES). The researchers discuss how their ﬁnd- ings depart from previous deﬁcit-oriented cultural research that suggested lower parental attachment in Black youths. This study The previous research on attachment and race that we reviewed has shown mixed results with a tentative trend toward Black individuals scoring lower on some parental attachment measures. We did ﬁnd one exception (Giordano et al., 1993), but that dataset was not collected in the South of the United States (unlike the this study). The article that did ﬁnd lower attachment in Black young children (Bakermans-Kranenburg et al., 2004) sampled from the multiple regions of the United States. When pairing this trend with our own ﬁndings (Patihis et al., 2018) that the memory of love measure (MLPQ) correlates positively with some parental attachment measures, we would expect that Black college students may report lower scores on the MLPQ compared to White students. While making that prediction, we also measure possible variables that vary across cultures and may explain diﬀerences between the Black and White groups. These possible explanatory variables include self-reported SES, income, stress, childhood trauma, diﬀerences in the number of years of parental contact in childhood, and years of education. We also include measures to control for other factors such as socioeconomic, biological, aﬀective, clinical, and memory-bias factors. If we do ﬁnd diﬀerences in the memory of love experienced in childhood in Black and White individuals, we posit that these diﬀerences will be predominantly due to cultural factors. Method Participants For this study, 280 undergraduates in the South of the United States partici- pated for course credit (M age ¼21.5 years,SD¼5.58; range 18–52). Of these participants, 125 self-identiﬁed as White, 124 as African American or Black (referred to as ‘‘Black’’ hereafter for brevity), 16 Asian, 8 Hispanic or Latino, 1 American Indian or Native Alaskan, 1 Native Hawaiian or Paciﬁc Islander, Patihis et al.883 and 6 as ‘‘other please specify.’’ Here, we compared only Black and White par- ticipants in this article (N¼249). Of these 249 students, 208 (83.5%) were female (106 Black and 102 White females). The study was approved for human subjects (IRB #16011902; USM). Measures Self-reported demographic measures were taken, including gender, age, race/ ethnicity, American College Testing (ACT) scores, mother and father’s educa- tional and income levels, and SES. In addition, in-depth parental background questions asking about the participants’ mother and father were presented (e.g., the number of years spent living with each parent during childhood, whether each parent is the biological parent or not, whether the parents are separated). Positive and Negative Affect Schedule.Participants completed the Positive and Negative Aﬀect Schedule (PANAS) 20-item short form (Watson, Clark, & Tellegen, 1988). The PANAS consists of two 10-item scales representing negative and positive current mood/aﬀect. Each 10-item subscale has high internal reli- ability (Cronbach’s s>.84) and the two subscales are not highly correlated (rs<.23 in magnitude; Watson et al., 1988). In our dataset, the negative PANAS subscale items had high internal reliability ( ¼.93), as did the positive subscale items ( ¼.91). The two subscales, positive and negative, correlated with a low eﬀect size in our dataset (r¼.17,p¼.012). Memory of Love towards Parents Questionnaire.To assess the participant’s memory of love for each parent during childhood, we utilized the MLPQ (for devel- opment and psychometrics, see Patihis et al., 2018). In the MLPQ, participants are asked to recall their love for both their mother and father (separately) during the ﬁrst, sixth, and ninth grades (K-12 schooling grades) and to also rate their current feelings of love. There are 28 items used in each of the eight subscales of the long-form MLPQ. Of the 28 items, half ask participants about thefrequencyof their feelings of love, aﬀection, and so forth, while the other half of the items inquire about thestrengthof the feeling. For instance, one frequency-item reads, ‘‘During the whole year when you werein ﬁrst grade, how often on averagedid you feelwarmthtoward yourmother?’’ As an example of a strength-item, one question read, ‘‘During the whole year when you were in ﬁrst grade,how strong on averagewas youraﬀectiontoward yourFather?’’ (bold and italics as in the original). In Patihis et al. (2018), we found good test–retest reliability of each subscale (rs>.85), and an expected pattern of correlation with corresponding related attachment measures (ranger¼.10 to .77), and little evidence of order eﬀects. Factor analyses (see Patihis et al., 2018) revealed a distinct and single factor within each MLPQ subscale, and 884Psychological Reports 122(3) that these factors were all distinct from any factors loading on a variety of parental attachment measures. Within each subscale of the MLPQ, we found good internal reliability (Cronbach’s s>.95) in the dataset of the current study. Traumatic Experiences Checklist.We utilized the Traumatic Experiences Checklist (TEC) (Nijenhuis, Spinhoven, Van Dyck, Van dar hart, & Vanderlinden, 1998; Nijenhuis, Van der Hart, & Kruger, 2002) because it pro- vides a good measure of overall trauma. The self-report questions con- tained short statements of a traumatic event, and the participants were asked whether they had experienced that traumatic event and how it aﬀected them. One example of a statement is: ‘‘Sexual abuse (unwanted sexual acts involving physical contact) by your parents, brothers, or sisters.’’ After each statement, the participants are asked ‘‘Did this happen to you?’’, how old they were when the trauma happened, and ‘‘How much impact did this have on you?’’ on a scale from 1 to 5 (1¼none,2¼a little bit,3¼a moderate amount,4¼quite a bit,and 5¼an extreme amount). These items are scored to count trauma from childhood (ages 0–18) and to take into account high self-reported impact (for TEC scoring see Nijenhuis et al., 1998. Speciﬁc subscales of the TEC include the participants’ total trauma score and subscales calculated from the sum of items asking about emotional neglect, emotional abuse, bodily threat, sexual harassment, and sexual abuse. Perceived Stress Scale.The short-form four-item Perceived Stress Scale (Cohen, Kamarck, & Mermelstein, 1983) was used in our study. In Cohen et al. (1983), they found the four-item scale had good internal reliability ( ¼.72) and test– retest reliability was .55. The researchers found the four-item short-form scale to be valid with respect to its correlation with stress-relieving activity (e.g., cigarette use). The scale demonstrated good reliability and validity (with relevant correl- ates such as life-events, social anxiety, and depressive symptoms). In the current dataset, we found the internal reliability to be good within the four items ( ¼.75). Beck Depression Inventory.The Beck Depression Inventory (BDI) is a 21-item self- report inventory used to measure depressive symptoms in adolescents and adults (Beck, Ward, Mendelson, Mock, & Erbaugh, 1961). Some items on the inven- tory measure depressive feelings (e.g., deep and prolonged sadness) and various symptoms of depression (e.g., loss of pleasure). Participants rate themselves on a scale of 0 (not experiencing the symptom)to3(experiencing to a great degree). The scores are summed and can range from 0 to 63, with higher numbers sug- gesting more depressive symptoms. The BDI has shown evidence for convergent validity: correlating with the Zung Self-reported Depression Scale (range Patihis et al.885 .62–.83, Beck, Steer, & Carbin, 1988; Zung, 1965). The BDI also has a high reliability rating with an average Cronbach’s of .87 as well as a test–retest reliability ranging from .60 to .90 (Beck et al., 1988). In the current dataset, we found that 21 items of the BDI had high internal reliability ( ¼.88). State–Trait Inventory for Cognitive and Somatic Anxiety.The State–Trait Inventory for Cognitive and Somatic Anxiety (STICSA) (Gro ¨s, Antony, Simms, & McCabe, 2007; Ree, French, MacLeod, & Locke, 2008) was created to measure mental (cognitive) and physical (somatic) anxiety in the moment (state) as well as a per- sistent trait anxiety. It consists of four subscales: trait-cognitive, trait-somatic, state-cognitive, and trait-somatic. Ree et al. (2008) found undergraduate stu- dents scored means ranging from 13 to 19 (their Table 4). In clinical populations with disorders related to anxiety, the subscale means ranged from 20 to 29 (Gro ¨s et al., 2007, their Table 5). The STICSA was found to have high internal con- sistency, with Cronbach s of subscales ranging from of .75 to .92 (clinical sample range .87 to .92, Gro ¨s et al., 2007; undergraduate range .75 to .84). Test–retest reliability (taken several weeks apart; Ree et al., 2008, Study 3) was found to be higher in the trait anxiety subscales (cognitiver¼.66, somatic r¼.60) compared to the state anxiety scales (cognitiver¼.49; somaticr¼.31). These researchers also established the validity of the STICSA in both under- graduates and clinical samples. For example, the STISCA trait subscales correl- ate more with the trait subscale of the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory (Spielberger, 1983) compared to the state subscale, and vice versa (undergradu- ates, Ree et al., 2008; clinical sample, Gro ¨s et al., 2007). In the current dataset, the internal consistency of each subscale was as follows: State: ¼.91 and Trait: ¼.92. Big Five Inventory.The Big Five Inventory (BFI-10) (Rammstedt & John, 2007) is a short 10-item abbreviated version of the BFI-44 (John, Donahue, & Kentle, 1991). The BFI-10 retains good internal consistency (correlations with BFI-44 factors ranging from .74–.89), test–retest reliability (.72), and convergent validity with the NEO-PI-R (Costa & McCrae, 1992), with an averager¼.71 across the ﬁve factors. Single-Item Narcissism Scale.Using just a single item: ‘‘To what extent do you agree with this statement: ‘I am a narcissist’. (Note: the word ‘narcissist’ means egotistical, self-focused, and vain.),’’ Konrath, Meier, and Bushman (2014) established acceptable psychometric properties. The seven-point Likert- type scale ranges from 1¼not very true of meto 7¼very true of me. Konrath et al. (2014) found high test–retest reliability of .78, correlates with several existing narcissism measures (ranger¼.28–.50), is predictive of related out- comes such as risk-taking (r¼.19), hostility (r¼.34), short-term mating orien- tation (r¼.34), and less prosocial behavior. 886Psychological Reports 122(3) Procedure Participants were recruited online using SONA Research Systems, an online management and participation recruitment tool. Of the 249 students, 165 (88 Black and 77 White) participated in the laboratory, while 84 (36 Black and 48 White) participated online at a place of their choosing (most at home). We found that lab-based versus online participation had no eﬀect on MLPQ scores (Patihis et al., 2018). Both online and in-laboratory participants participated for two sessions. For both sessions, online participants were encouraged to set aside at least an hour of their time and ﬁnd a quiet location free from any distractions. In the laboratory setting, a computer was used for the participants to complete the study on. When participants entered the laboratory, a research assistant informed the participant about the study and that the survey would take no longer than an hour to complete. Soon after this brief introduction, the partici- pant was seated and could begin. Once participants began the study, they ﬁrst read a study information sheet, demographic questions, background questions about parents, and the 28 MLPQ items. At the conclusion of the study, the participants read a debrieﬁng sheet. Following each participant’s completion of the study, they were compensated for their time with class credit on the SONA Research Systems. The session had a median duration of 44 minutes. The majority of the data presented in this study were collected in the ﬁrst session detailed above. However, a few variables were collected one week later in the second session (e.g., variables such as BDI, BFI-10, and Single-Item Narcissism Scale). The MLPQ subscales were also again ﬁlled out for psycho- metric purposes during this session (results reported in Patihis, et al., 2018). This second session had a medium duration of 39 minutes. Results Black participants had signiﬁcantly higher scores on the MLPQ subscales for their mothers in the ﬁrst, sixth, and ninth grades compared to White partici- pants. Figure 1 illustrates the pattern of results. Speciﬁcally, Black college stu- dents reported higher scores on memory of love for their mothers in the ﬁrst grade (M¼5.37,SD¼0.86) than White students (M¼4.98,SD¼1.16), t(242)¼ 3.07,p¼.002, Cohen’sd¼.38. Black students also reported higher memory of love for their mothers in the sixth grade (M¼4.99,SD¼1.22) than White students (M¼4.44,SD¼1.40),t(242)¼ 3.26,p¼.001,d¼.41. In add- ition, Black participants reported higher memory of love scores for their mothers in the ninth grade (M¼4.65,SD¼1.42) than White students (M¼4.17, SD¼1.56),t(242)¼ 2.50,p¼.013,d¼.32. There were no signiﬁcant diﬀer- ences between Black and White participants on the father MLPQ subscales. We conducted a hierarchical linear regression to examine these relationships further, statistically adjusting for numerous theoretically and empirically Patihis et al.887 relevant factors. See Table 1 for our analysis of possible covariates of the rela- tionship between race and memory of love for one’s mother during ﬁrst grade. Controlling for demographics, SES, years of shared residence with mother during childhood (and father), biological, and a number variables of possible memory biases. When statistically adjusted in the regression analysis, none of these variables eliminated the statistically signiﬁcant relationship between race and memory of love toward mothers during ﬁrst grade. Age, childhood house- hold income, years of shared residence with mother during childhood, current appraisals of mother, and depressive symptoms were all signiﬁcant predictors of MLPQ for mothers at ﬁrst grade. But none of these signiﬁcant predictors reduced the regression coeﬃcient for race. In fact, controlling for socioeco- nomic factors lead to an increase from ¼.19 to .24, and then controlling for potential memory biases (such as depression and current appraisals) reduced it back down to ¼.19. See also Table S1 in the Supplemental Materials that establishes that additional variables also do not explain the relationship between race and memory of love for mothers: such as a measure of academic achieve- ment (ACT scores), recent successes and failures, Big Five personality traits, perceived stress, and exposure to traumatic experiences in childhood. Similar patterns were found in Tables S2 and S3, for memory of love for mothers during sixth grade. As shown in Table S2, the relationship between race and memory of love remained signiﬁcant and of similar eﬀect size ( .2) when controlling for all the aforementioned variables in the model. One diﬀerence, when compared to the MLPQ ﬁrst grade regression, is that household income during childhood was a signiﬁcant predictor, but when adjusting for household 4.98 4.44 4.17 5.37 4.98 4.65 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 5.0 5.5 6.0 Grade 1 Grade 6 Grade 9 Memory of Love Towards Mothers White Black Figure 1.Memory of love toward mother means scores for Black and White college stu- dents for various points in childhood (MLPQ subscales). Mean scores are given above each bar. The differences between Black and White participants were statistically significant in each subscale shown. Error bars represent standard error of the mean. 888Psychological Reports 122(3) Table 1.Hierarchical regression on memory of love for mothers during first grade: Race (Black and White) remains a significant predictor when adjusting for demographics, SES, familial differences, and covariates. Predictors pVIFR 2 Adjusted R 2 Change R 2 Model 1: Demographics.056 .044 .056** Black or White .188 .003 1.003 Age .139 .026 1.002 Gender .011 .862 1.004 Model 2: + SES Factors.227 .201 .171*** Black or White .242<.001 1.193 Age .068 .252 1.091 Gender .024 .675 1.026 Socioeconomic status .007 .914 1.129 Mother’s level of education .012 .851 1.230 Household income childhood .196 .004 1.436 0–18, years with mother .382<.001 1.094 0–18, years with father .096 .128 1.231 Model 3: + Bio and Memory Biases.478 .442 .251*** Black or White .189 .001 1.408 Age .034 .520 1.218 Gender .002 .965 1.102 Socioeconomic status .055 .304 1.262 Mother’s level of education .002 .975 1.254 Household income childhood .085 .153 1.553 0–18, years with mother .284<.001 1.181 0–18, years with father .064 .233 1.272 Biological Hours of sleep last night .009 .866 1.148 Caffeine in last 24 hours .031 .551 1.214 Alcohol in last 24 hours .079 .109 1.081 Self-reported health .056 .279 1.199 Memory biases Current appraisal of mother .464<.001 1.289 Positive mood (PANAS) .006 .920 1.336 Negative mood (PANAS) .036 .524 1.382 Depression (BDI) .151 .007 1.355 Note.Dependent variable: Memory of love toward mother during first grade using 28 items Questionnaire. Missing values replaced by means. Boldface indicates statistically significant predictor atp<.05. See also Table S1. VIF: variance inflation factor; PANAS: Positive and Negative Affect Schedule; BDI: Beck’s Depression Inventory; SES: socioeconomic status; Durbin Watson¼2.064.**p<.01, ***p<.001. Patihis et al.889 income it did not eliminate the signiﬁcant relationship between race and memory of love. As shown in Table S3, when statistically adjusting for academic achieve- ment, recent successes and failures, personality traits, stress, and exposure to traumatic experiences, the relationship between race and memory of love during sixth grade remained statistically signiﬁcant. Tables S4 and S5 demonstrate that the relationship between race and memory of love toward mothers during ninth grade is also not rendered nonsigniﬁcant when statistically adjusting for the covariates in those models. Statistically adjusting for demographics, SES, diﬀerence in parental contact, academic achievement, biological factors, factors that might bias memory, and stress did not render the relationship between race and the MLPQ ninth grade subscale for mothers nonsigniﬁcant. Age was a signiﬁcant negative predictor in all the regression models for memory of love during ninth grade: meaning as age increased, ratings of remembered feelings of love during ninth grade decreased. Table 2 (and Table S6 in more detail) documents the descriptive statistics within Black and White groupings on measures that we investigated as covari- ates in this study, including socioeconomic, academic achievement, biological/ health, appraisals, mood, personality, and clinical measures. We found that Black participants scored higher on several variables, such as the proportion growing up in a house for the most part without a father present (31% vs. 14% in White participants), on negative mood, and on agreeableness. White partici- pants reported higher scores on SES, income, years living in same house as their father, ACT scores, hours of sleep last night, caﬀeine consumption, self-reported health, satisfaction with life, and life successes in the last year. Despite all these diﬀerences, statistical adjustment for these variables did not eliminate the sig- niﬁcant relationship between race and memory of love toward mothers. Most of those regression models are shown in Tables 1 and Tables S1–S5, and other models that interchanged covariates in the regression to avoid multicollinearity (e.g., depression substituted with anxiety; or participant’s SES with father’s SES, available from corresponding author on request) yielded the same result of not eliminate the statistically signiﬁcant relationship between race and memory of love toward mothers. Discussion This study investigated memory of love toward parents among Black and White college students. Our goal was to explore whether White young adults remem- bered their love for their parents more or less than Black young adults, and if so, why. Based on past research that had shown a slight trend toward less secure parental attachment among Black individuals, we expected Black individuals to score similarly lower on memory of love toward parents. However, we found Black students reported higher scores of their memory of love for their mother during childhood more than White students. This relationship was not explained 890Psychological Reports 122(3) Table 2.Means,SD, andt-test statistics comparing Black and White individuals on demographic, SES, familial, achievement, biological, personality, and clinical measures. GroupnMSD t p Age Black 124 21.54 5.03 0.40 .689 White 124 21.83 6.32 Gender Black 124 0.85 0.35 0.82 .411 White 125 0.82 0.39 Your socioeconomic status Black 124 4.80 1.68 1.12 .264 White 125 5.02 1.50 Your mother’s socioeconomic statusBlack 120 5.69 1.86 0.02 .984 White 122 5.70 2.07 Your father’s socioeconomic statusBlack 108 5.47 2.40 2.32 .021 White 115 6.18 2.17 Total household income growing up.Black 91 3.36 1.90 6.30<.001 White 107 5.09 1.96 Your mother’s current annual salaryBlack 89 2.94 1.59 2.12 .035 White 106 3.49 1.95 Your father’s current annual salaryBlack 71 3.63 1.99 2.77 .006 White 98 4.52 2.10 0–18, how many years live in same house as your mother?Black 124 16.52 3.83 0.14 .891 White 125 16.58 3.95 0–18, how many years live in same house as your father?Black 124 9.19 7.96 4.19<.001 White 125 13.10 6.75 Lived with single mother for most of childhood (1,0)Black 124 0.31 0.46 3.30 .001 White 125 0.14 0.34 Hours of sleep did you get last night?Black 124 6.32 1.82 2.58 .011 White 125 7.00 2.28 Caffeine in the last 24 hours? Black 124 0.63 0.93 5.16<.001 White 125 1.47 1.56 In general, how you rate your health today?Black 124 3.90 0.74 2.30 .023 White 125 4.10 0.69 Current appraisal mother Black 124 4.16 1.09 0.82 .411 White 123 4.04 1.08 Satisfaction with Life Scale Black 124 22.35 6.68 3.14 .002 White 125 24.90 6.18 Successes in your life in the last year?Black 124 0.76 0.43 2.33 .020 White 125 0.87 0.34 (continued) Patihis et al.891 statistically by socioeconomic factors, number of years spent living in the house with each parent, nor by a large number of other relevant variables. The higher reported memory of love in Blacks is an intriguing ﬁnding in the context of the cultural diﬀerences that may have resulted from the diﬀerent origins of each cul- ture—in the context of Black and White history in the South of the United States. Even more interesting is that the factors often used to explain cultural diﬀerences between Black and White individuals in the United States—factors commonly mentioned in prior research on race and often linked to stereotypical views of each group—do not explain these diﬀerences in memories of aﬀection toward mothers. These ﬁndings were somewhat unexpected based on some previous ﬁndings where Black children were found to be less securely attached to their mothers compared to White children (e.g., Bakermans-Kranenburg et al., 2004). In com- bination with this ﬁnding, we had found a moderate correlation between attach- ment measures and our MLPQ corresponding subscales (Patihis et al., 2018). However, our results can be considered somewhat consistent with some rarer studies that have shown Black individuals scoring higher on items related to attachment, such as caring, trust, and intimacy in the family (Cernkovich & Giordano, 1987; Giordano et al., 1993). We propose that these and our results highlight something diﬀerent to the typical deﬁcit-narrative that pervades research that compares Black and White individuals. Our research may illustrate that there may be an aﬀective advantage, aside from research showing deﬁcits, to African-American culture that may not have been fully realized until this article. The task, then, is to explain the higher memory of love toward mothers in Black individuals. Unlike some past research, demographics and socioeconomic Table 2.Continued. GroupnMSD t p Negative PANAS Black 124 31.91 1.87 2.07 .039 White 125 29.27 9.18 Big Five agreeableness Black 95 8.13 1.55 2.40 .017 White 100 7.59 1.56 Depressive symptoms (BDI) Black 96 7.91 7.62 0.70 .483 White 102 7.18 6.99 Total exposure traumatic experiences (TEC) ages 0–18Black 95 10.33 12.55 0.22 .828 White 99 9.97 10.23 Perceived Stress Scale Black 124 6.48 3.15 1.15 .251 White 125 6.04 2.82 Note: Boldface indicates a significant difference atp<.05. See also Table S6. BDI: Beck’s Depression Inventory; TEC: Traumatic Experiences Checklist; PANAS: Positive and Negative Affect Schedule; SES: socioeconomic status. 892Psychological Reports 122(3) diﬀerences did not explain it. When we controlled for age and gender, the dif- ference remained. Gender of the participant had no signiﬁcant eﬀect on the relationship between race/ethnicity and memory of love toward their mother. Age was a low eﬀect size and negative predictor of memory of love toward the mother during childhood in several models—as age increased memory of love decreased—but when statistically adjusted, this did not eliminate the signiﬁcant relationship between race and memory of love toward mothers. Importantly, self-reported SES (of participants or of parents), levels of education of the par- ents, and income of the parents also did not explain the diﬀerence between Black and White individuals on memory of love for the mother. This held true in additional regressions not illustrated in the article, whereby we would substitute in one correlated variable for another to avoid collinearity (e.g., replacing par- ticipant’s SES for mother’s or father’s SES; or replacing childhood income with the participant’s, mother’s, or father’s, current income). We also found that the number of years living with the mother, or father, during childhood did not explain the diﬀerence on memory of love between Black and White participants. This ﬁnding held when we substituted these variables with a single-mother dummy variable (dichotomously coded: 0, 1; calculated from these variables) as a covariate: the eﬀect size and statistical signiﬁcance of the race variable remained. When examining another aspect of SES, educational achievement, we also found that academic achievement (on the ACT) did not explain the race diﬀerences on memory of love toward mothers. This suggests that lower scores on memory of love toward mothers in White individuals are not adequately explained by the idea that their culture in childhood focused on academic performance at the expense of aﬀection. Cultural diﬀerences may also aﬀect personality development, and in turn eﬀect diﬀerences in adult appraisal of one’s parents. Indeed, we found Black individuals self-reporting higher agreeableness than White participants, though no other personality measures yielded signiﬁcantly diﬀerent means. We found that personality diﬀerences did not explain the diﬀerences in memories of aﬀec- tion for one’s mother between Black and White participants. In other words, whatever diﬀerences that culture might aﬀect, in measures such as conscientious- ness, agreeableness, neuroticism, openness, and narcissism (all of which could theoretically aﬀect memory of love toward a parent), such factors did not explain why Black individuals report more memory of love. We cannot say, for example, that Black individuals remember more love toward mothers because they are less narcissistic or neurotic, nor because they are more open, extroverted, agreeable, or conscientious. Any diﬀerences in Southern culture in Black and White individuals do not aﬀect personality development to such a degree that it would explain our main ﬁndings. It is important to take into account that we are measuring retrospective measures of feelings of love that are not taken at the time during childhood. Patihis et al.893 This retrospective reporting can create systematic memory biases—these can be caused by factors such as changing appraisals, feelings, mood, and sleep (see Patihis & Herrera, 2018; see also Frenda, Patihis, Lewis, Loftus, & Fenn, 2014). Some of these factors that could create a memory bias in recalling emo- tions, such as current appraisals of participants’ mother, perceived stress, depression, anxiety, and recent losses in the last year showed no diﬀerences in Black and White participants. Other factors, such as negative mood, sleep, sat- isfaction with life, successes in the last year, were diﬀerent in Black and White participants (negative mood was higher while the other variables were lower in Black participants). However, when statistically adjusted for, none of these vari- ables explained the relationship between race and memory of love for mothers. Our variables did not explain the diﬀerences on memory of childhood feelings of love between Black and White participants, and our independent variables and covariates only accounted for half of the variance in the MLPQ mother subscales. What, then, could explain the diﬀerences in memory of love for one’s mother in Black and White participants? We posit that there are unmeasured, and perhaps unmeasurable, cultural diﬀerences between Black and White indi- viduals in the South that may explain it. We found that socioeconomic and some family dynamic factors (e.g., growing up with a single mother) are not statistic- ally valid explanations. Other factors, such as perceived racism or diﬀerences in feelings of belongingness may in turn cause a retrospective need to emotionally connect with one’s mother. Black students may feel a relatively lower amount of emotional comfort and support from their White peers and faculty in college (e.g., Ancis, Sedlacek, & Mohr, 2000). This may in turn increase a need to bond with someone who oﬀered them emotional comfort in the past. However, we might expect these feelings to correlate with negative mood. However, statistical adjustment for negative mood did not explain the diﬀerence between Black and White students on their memory of love of mothers. Another explanation may be cultural diﬀerences in individualism and col- lectivism between Black and White Americans. In fact, Coon and Kemmelmeir (2001) found that Black individuals scored higher on collectivism and Gaines et al. (1997) also found that they scored higher on familism (orientation toward the welfare of the family) compared to White individuals. Coon and Kemmelmeir (2001) believe that minority groups who are excluded from the majority seek collectivism and connectedness among other members of their ethnic group. The more collectivistic culture in the Black community may in turn lead to higher reporting in remembering aﬀection for important female ﬁgures in that community. Another possible explanation is the internalization in Black participants of the important role of Black women in African- American culture, perhaps inﬂuenced by stereotypes such as the nurturing Black woman (e.g., see Bobo, 1995) or the strong Black woman/superwoman who is devoted to and taking care of immediate and extended families (Beauboeuf-Lafontant, 2005, 2007; Nelson, Cardemil, & Adeoye, 2016). 894Psychological Reports 122(3) However, these explanations must be tentative and may be further assessed in future research. There are some limitations to our study. It should be stressed that we mea- suredmemoryof love toward parents in childhood—we did not measure love that participants felt for their parentsat the timeduring those years. Thus, the results are likely biased by current appraisals of the parents (Patihis & Herrera, 2018), though when we controlled for such possible biases the main ﬁndings held. In addition, this study was limited to one geographic area, and generaliza- tion may be limited to the Deep South of the United States. Black and White individuals from other locations in the world will have diﬀering histories and cultures and thus may diﬀer from our sample on their memories toward their parents. In addition, the participants were exclusively university students, and the majority were women, so results may not generalize to adults who are not college students with this particular set of demographics. Future research could investigate samples in other parts of the United States and in other countries. In summary, a few studies found that Black children were less securely attached to their mothers compared to White children. No past research was previously conducted on memory of love and race, and our study addressed this gap in the literature. Unexpectedly, we found Black students reported higher memory of love for their mothers in ﬁrst, sixth, and ninth grade. This relation- ship was not diminished by statistically adjusting for socioeconomic factors or whether the father was present in the home. We conclude that individuals who identify as Black may have been exposed to diﬀerent cultural factors that led them to remember more love toward their mothers in childhood. However, these factors were not socioeconomic or any of the other variables we measured. It is an important ﬁnding because the ﬁndings are in the opposite direction to some previous studies on attachment, and it illuminates potentially positive aspects of the Black experience, which is in contrast to the majority of past research that has been deﬁcit-focused. Declaration of Conflicting Interests The author(s) declared no potential conﬂicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article. Funding The author(s) disclosed receipt of the following ﬁnancial support for the research, author- ship, and/or publication of this article: Funding was provided in parts from the University of Southern Mississippi’s Oﬃce of Research, a McNair Scholars Program award, and an Eagle SPUR award. ORCID iD Lawrence Patihis http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2870-8986 Patihis et al.895 References Ainsworth, M. D. S., Blehar, M. C., Waters, E., & Wall, S. (1978).Patterns of attachment. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum. Ancis, J. R., Sedlacek, W. E., & Mohr, J. J. (2000). Student perceptions of campus cultural climate by race.Journal of Counseling and Development,78, 180–185. Bakermans-Kranenburg, M. J., van IJzendoorn, M. H., & Kroonenberg, P. M. (2004). Differences in attachment security between African-American and white children: Ethnicity or socio-economic status?Infant Behavior and Development,27, 417–433. Beauboeuf-Lafontant, T. (2005). Keeping up appearances, getting fed up: The embodi- ment of strength among African American women.Meridians: Feminism, Race, Transnationalism,5, 104–123. Beauboeuf-Lafontant, T. (2007). You have to show strength: An exploration of gender, race, and depression.Gender & Society,21, 28–51. Beck, A. T., Steer, R. A., & Carbin, M. G. (1988). Psychometric properties of the Beck Depression Inventory: Twenty-five years of evaluation.Clinical Psychology Review,8, 77–100. Beck, A. T., Ward, C. H., Mendelson, M., Mock, J., & Erbaugh, J. (1961). An inventory for measuring depression.Archives of General Psychiatry,4, 561–571. Bobo, J. (1995).Black women as cultural readers. New York, NY: Columbia University Press. Brennan, K. A., Clark, C. L., & Shaver, P. R. (1998). Self-report measurement of adult attachment: An integrative overview. In J. A. Simpson & W. S. Rholes (Eds.), Attachment theory and close relationships(pp. 46–76). New York, NY: Guilford Press. Cernkovich, S. A., & Giordano, P. C. (1987). Family relationships and delinquency. Criminology,25, 295–319. Cohen, S., Kamarck, T., & Mermelstein, R. (1983). A global measure of perceived stress. Journal of health & Social behavior,24, 385–396. Coon, H. M., & Kemmelmeier, M. (2001). Cultural orientations in the United States: (Re) examining differences among ethnic groups.Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology,32, 348–364. Costa, P. T., & McCrae, R. R. (1992). Four ways five factors are basic.Personality and Individual Differences,13, 653–665. Dexter, C. A., Wong, K., Stacks, A. M., Beeghly, M., & Barnett, D. (2013). Parenting and attachment among low-income African American and Caucasian preschoolers. Journal of Family Psychology,27, 629. Emmen, R. A., Malda, M., Mesman, J., van IJzendoorn, M. H., Prevoo, M. J., & Yeniad, N. (2013). Socioeconomic status and parenting in ethnic minority families: Testing a minority family stress model.Journal of Family Psychology,27, 896–904. Frenda, S. J., Patihis, L., Loftus, E. F., Lewis, H. C., & Fenn, K. M. (2014). Sleep deprivation and false memories.Psychological Science,25, 1674–1681. Gaines, S. O., Marelich, W. D., Bledsoe, K. L., Steers, W. N., Henderson, M. C., & Page, M. S. (1997). Links between race/ethnicity and cultural values as mediated by racial/ ethnic identity and moderated by gender.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 72, 1460–1476. 896Psychological Reports 122(3) Giordano, P. C., Cernkovich, S. A., & DeMaris, A. (1993). The family and peer relations of black adolescents.Journal of Marriage & Family,55, 277–287. Gro ¨s, D. F., Antony, M. M., Simms, L. J., & McCabe, R. E. (2007). Psychometric properties of the State-Trait Inventory for Cognitive and Somatic Anxiety (STICSA): Comparison to the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory (STAI).Psychological Assessment,19, 369–381. Haggerty, K. P., Skinner, M. L., McGlynn-Wright, A., Catalano, R. F., & Crutchfield, R. D. (2013). Parent and peer predictors of violent behavior of black and white teens. Violence & Victims,28, 145–160. John, O. P., Donahue, E. M., & Kentle, R. L. (1991).The Big Five Inventory—versions 4a and 54. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press. Konrath, S., Meier, B. P., & Bushman, B. J. (2014). Development and validation of the Single Item Narcissism Scale (SINS).PLOS One,9, e103469. Mesman, J., van IJzendoorn, M. H., & Bakermans-Kranenburg, M. J. (2012). Unequal in opportunity, equal in process: Parental sensitivity promotes positive child develop- ment in ethnic minority families.Child Development Perspectives,6, 239–250. Nelson, T., Cardemil, E. V., & Adeoye, C. T. (2016). Rethinking strength: Black women’s perceptions of the ‘strong Black woman’ role.Psychology of Women Quarterly,40, 551–563. Nijenhuis, E. R., Spinhoven, P., Van Dyck, R., van der Hart, O., & Vanderlinden, J. (1998). Degree of somatoform and psychological dissociation in dissociative disorder is correlated with reported trauma.Journal of Traumatic Stress,11, 711–730. Nijenhuis, E. R., Van der Hart, O., & Kruger, K. (2002). The psychometric characteristics of the Traumatic Experiences Checklist (TEC): First findings among psychiatric out- patients.Clinical Psychology & Psychotherapy,9, 200–210. Parker, G., Tupling, H., & Brown, L. B. (1979). A parental bonding instrument.British Journal of Medical Psychology,52, 1–10. Patihis, L., & Herrera, M. E. (2018).The Malleability of Memory of Love towards Mothers: The Role of Current Appraisals. Manuscript submitted for publication. Patihis, L., Herrera, M. E., & Arnau, R. C. (2018).Memory of love towards Parents Questionnaire: Development and psychometric evaluation. Manuscript submitted for publication. Rammstedt, B., & John, O. P. (2007). Measuring personality in one minute or less: A 10- item short version of the Big Five Inventory in English and German.Journal of Research in Personality,41, 203–212. Ree, M. J., French, D., MacLeod, C., & Locke, V. (2008). Distinguishing cognitive and somatic dimensions of state and trait anxiety: Development and validation of the State-Trait Inventory for Cognitive and Somatic Anxiety (STICSA).Behavioural & Cognitive Psychotherapy,36, 313–332. Rice, K. G., Cunningham, T. J., & Young, M. B. (1997). Attachment to parents, social competence, and emotional well-being: A comparison of Black and White late ado- lescents.Journal of Counseling Psychology,44, 89–101. Spielberger, C. D. (1983).Manual for the State–Trait Anxiety Inventory: STAI (Form Y). Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press. Waters, E. (1995). Appendix A: The attachment Q-set (version 3.0).Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development,30 , 234–246. Patihis et al.897 Watson, D., Clark, L. A., & Tellegen, A. (1988). Development and validation of brief measures of positive and negative affect.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54, 1063–1070. Wei, M., Russell, D. W., Mallinckrodt, B., & Zakalik, R. A. (2004). Cultural equivalence of adult attachment across four ethnic groups: Factor structure, structured means, and associations with negative mood.Journal of Counseling Psychology,51, 408–417. Zung, W. W. (1965). A self-rating depression scale.Archives of General Psychiatry,12, 63–70. Author Biographies Lawrence Patihis, PhD, is an assistant professor of experimental psychology at the University of Southern Mississippi. He specializes in memory research. He obtained his doctorate, advised by Elizabeth Loftus and Linda Levine, at the University of California, Irvine, where he was a National Science Foundation GRFP awardee. Corai E. Jacksonis an undergraduate psychology student, a McNair Scholar, and Eagle SPUR awardee at the University of Southern Mississippi. Jonathan C. Diazis an undergraduate psychology student and an Eagle SPUR awardee at the University of Southern Mississippi. Elena V. Stepanova, PhD, is an assistant professor in the Department of Psychology at the University of Southern Mississippi, a position she has held since 2013. Her broad area of interest is social cognition, including cross-cultural research, particularly explicit and implicit ethnic and racial attitudes. Mario E. Herrera, BA, is a doctoral student in experimental psychology at the University of Southern Mississippi, where he focuses on false memory and memory for emotions. He earned his Bachelors of Arts degree in Psychology from California State University, Northridge. 898Psychological Reports 122(3) Copyright ofPsychological Reportsisthe property ofSage Publications Inc.anditscontent may notbecopied oremailed tomultiple sitesorposted toalistserv without thecopyright holder’s expresswrittenpermission. However,usersmayprint, download, oremail articles for individual use.
Your Essay Outline worksheet should include: Worksheet attached to the question where you need to put your answer make sure to fulfill the requirements as well as make sure all questions are answered
Final Essay Outline PSYC 101 Name (ID): __________________ 1 Introduction: Which behaviour and which concepts/variables from psychology have you identified? Evidence Paragraph 1: Definition of concept and example of how it is defined and used in the article. Evidence Paragraph 3: Summary of article (What was the research question, how did they conduct the study: sample/population/ research method, Evaluation: What are 2 things that you find interesting about this article? the findings? the way the data was collected? How the conclusions were drawn? Conclusion:Summary of what you just said. Thesis Statement: Why do we make the link between the behaviour and biology? ____________________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________ Final Essay Outline PSYC 101 Name (ID): __________________ 2 List of References : You will take this information and get it ready in APA format for the final essay. 1. BOOK : That you use for the definitions of the concepts Author (s) Last Name, Initial of First Name : _________________ Date: ________________ Title of Book :__ _____________ Publisher for Book : ____________________ City, Country: _________: 2. RESEARCH ARTICLE : That you have chosen Author (s): ______________________________ Date: ____________________________________ Title of the Articl e:_______________________ __ Name of the Journal: _______________________ Volume (number), Pages : ____________________ DOI : _____________________